Just say no to +universal

[Elias Pipping]

On Mar 4, 2007, at 1:23 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:

> On 2007-03-03 19:44:32 -0800, Reid Nichol wrote:
> [...]
>>   Now, as for the messing up the Portfile thing.  Yes, everyone  
>> agrees
>> that having the universal binary hack in every Portfile is messy and
>> undesirable.  Please, stop bringing this up as it really is beating a
>> dead horse at this point.  Also, to assume that this is the only  
>> option
>> for including this functionality is ridiculous.
>>
>>   So, instead of trashing one bad idea (over and over), how about
>> discussing ways that might get this wanted functionality in with
>> minimal pain.  A couple ideas have already been thrown out there.   
>> How
>> about sticking to discussing those (or other ones)?
>
> Yes, and as this has been said somewhere, this should be done upstream
> (perhaps at the autoconf level, with a new option --enable-universal).
> Indeed, I don't see why only MacPorts users could be interested in
> universal binaries.
>


I guess nobody feels responsible for taking care of universal binaries:

   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00320.html

> -- 
> Vincent Lefèvre <vincent at vinc17.org> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/ 
> blog/>
> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS- 
> Lyon)
> _______________________________________________
> macports-dev mailing list
> macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev